Re: Comments on accept-mutex/single-listen patch ??

[Jim Jagielski]

At 4:29 PM -0400 8/29/01, Bill Stoddard wrote:
>
>I still don't grok why SingleListen is needed. In fact, it seems down right dangerous 
>and
>I am -1 on this directive until someone bashes me with a clue stick :-)

I agree that it's dangerous... The intent was to make as much of the accept
mutex configuration runtime as possible, and SingleListen was easy to do...
Sort of having the capability to adjust during runtime (on or off) on
a platform by platform basis in real-world conditions.

To my mind, AcceptMutex is key, and if SingleListen needs to go
then fine...
-- 
===========================================================================
   Jim Jagielski   [|]   [EMAIL PROTECTED]   [|]   http://www.jaguNET.com/
      "A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order
                   will lose both and deserve neither"